User:Rursus/Phragmentes
Shell star
Shell star[edit]
FBTR
FBTR[edit]
http://www.princeton.edu/sgs/publications/sgs/archive/17-1-Ramana-India-FBR.pdf
Experiences from FBTR[edit]
The Fast Breeder Test Reactor (FBTR) was built by India’s Department of Atinuc Energy (DAE) in collaboration with the French Atomic Energy Commission (CEA), using design features of the French test reactor RAPSODIE and the Phenix reactor. The main purpose was to build a breeder reactor capable of using the low quality uranium sources available to India.
Thermal pulse
Thermal_pulse (no redirect) - remove redirect!
Thermal pulse[edit]
A thermal pulse is a short duration temporary change of nuclear fusion burning mode for stars. Asymptotic giant stars, a certain kind of red giant stars, have a later phase in their life when the fusion mode during short periods switches to and from helium shell burning, from their normal mode of hydrogen shell burning. These fusion mode changes are believed to cause a short temporal bluing of the star, in the order of 100 to 1000 years[citation needed]. This pulsing stage of AGB stars is called thermal pulsing asymptotic giant branch (TP-AGB).
End of life thermal pulse[edit]
An AGB final thermal pulse (AFTP) is believed to occur in the very last stage of the life of an AGB star after which it starts wandering in the HR-diagram in a wide arc bluewards and then successively downwards, the atmosphere shredded off and ejected by a stellar wind into a planetary nebula. Their photospheres are ejected into space, while hotter regions of the stars are revealed, emitting star winds that pushes the ejected gas into rings and bubbles of gas, constituting the characteristic planetary nebula structures. Each late thermal pulser is believed to get rid of their photospheres repeatedly until no fusioning core remains, and the former star slowly cools down to a white dwarf. Very late thermal pulses are believed to occur in white dwarfs that are ...
- In general, three types of “late” thermal pulse scenarios can be distinguished (e.g., Herwig et al. 1999, Blöcker 2003). (1) AGB Final Thermal Pulse (AFTP) takes place at the very end of the AGB phase, right before the star leaves this evolutionary stage. (2) Late Thermal Pulse (LTP) occurs when a star evolves off the AGB at phase 0.85 of the thermal pulse cycle and it is caught by a TP on the horizontal part of its post-AGB evolution in the H-R diagram. (3) Very Late Thermal Pulse occurs still later, when the hydrogen burning shell is extinguished and a star is descending along the white dwarf cooling track towards lower luminosities. In the VLTP case, the H-rich envelope is penetrated by the pulse-driven convective zone which leads to an additional short-lived H-flash. The abundance patterns produced in these three cases are somewhat different, but they all produce H-deficient ejecta and H-deficient post-AGB objects.[ther 1]
See also[edit]
References[edit]
- ^ Very Late Thermal Pulses Influenced by Accretion in Planetary Nebulae, by Frankowski & Soker, Technion/Israel
External links[edit]
Christian Evolutionism
Christian Evolutionism[edit]
As a reaction against the confrontative Creationism (f.ex. Intelligent Design) and a non-cultural authoritarian interpretation of the Bible, many main stream Christians explicitly express their adherence to Evolution and Scientific Method, while appointing the responsibility of religion to society and development of ethics.
Star class
Spectral class[edit]
Is not a new article. Don't edit here!
Aluminium-26
Aluminium-26[edit]
Take 2nd para from Isotopes of aluminium. Fix the text. Build a story involving:
- 26Mg overabundance,
- minor planet inner melting (Ceres?, Vesta) to explain differentiated planet intestines,
- possible irradiation creating magnetic fields in solar disk, Lyra, Wladimir "Turbulence-Assisted Planetary Growth: Hydrodynamical Simulations of Accretion Disks and Planet Formation"
- very good on cheese-sandwich (a metallic taste) when spiced with fermented platyhelminthes.
din Svyrg
din Svyrg[edit]
KEEP: There continues to be criticism regarding the wording of the final draft of the definition. Notably, the lead scientist on NASA's robotic mission to Pluto, Alan Stern, contends that, like Pluto, Earth, Mars, Jupiter and Neptune have not fully cleared their orbital zones either. Earth orbits with 10,000 near-Earth asteroids. Jupiter, meanwhile, is accompanied by 100,000 Trojan asteroids on its orbital path. "If Neptune had cleared its zone, Pluto wouldn't be there," he added. To this, one[who?] might object that there is a substantial difference in the extent to which the neighbourhood has been cleared between Pluto and the eight planets.[opinion needs balancing] Also, Pluto's position is due to the gravitational effects of Neptune as they are in orbital resonance.[opinion needs balancing]
Peduskeduu
Peduskeduu[edit]
Semisplit:
| -- | part | SNII | ccSN | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Intro | |||||||||
| §i1 | X | ||||||||
| §i2 | X | ||||||||
| §i3 | X | ||||||||
| §i4 | X | ||||||||
| Formation | |||||||||
| §F1 | X | ||||||||
| §F2 | X | ||||||||
| Core collapse | |||||||||
| §C1 | X | ||||||||
| §C2 | X | ||||||||
| §C3 | X | ||||||||
| §C4 | X | ||||||||
| §C5 | X | ||||||||
| Theoretical models | |||||||||
| §T1 | X | ||||||||
| §T2 | X | ||||||||
| §T3 | X | ||||||||
| Light curves and unusual spectra | |||||||||
| §L1 | X | ||||||||
| §L2 | X | ||||||||
| §L3 | X | ||||||||
| §L4 | X | ||||||||
| Hypernovae | |||||||||
| §H1 | |||||||||
Quidzhgilem
Quidzhgilem[edit]
- Studio: Biogenetic structuralism — crazy by all means, but studying exactly the same topics as I.
- Studio: Semiotics — something down to earth, something practical, something wrong. I think Ferdinand de Saussure fixes up some badly chosen relations regarding semantic, and otherwise the thingie might actually execute something useful.
- Studio: Mytheme - maybe, but the most constant structure in old constellations that have survived to our days, seem to be a fundamental primitive "seme", some simple meaning as "twin", rather than a myth complex, f.ex. MAŠ.TAB.BA.GAL.GAL/MAŠ.TAB.BA.TUR.TUR "twins" (no Castor/Pollux dichotomy, in the first case just two aspects of Nergal) that gave rise to Gemini "twins".
- Cybernetics
- General semantics
- Mad ramblings on code.wikia
Sane guys:
Actually executable, however malplacedly:
- F-logic or rather Flora-2. The problem is of course that it is too logical! That means the frame problem will make it explode when resolving irrelevantia.
TR "karlavagnen"
Karlavagnen[edit]
Svensk etymologisk ordbok 1922 To be used for ref in Big Dipper
| Karlavagnen, Stora Björnen, ä. nsv. även karle-, karl-, O. Petri Kr., y. fsv. karlawagnen; | Men's wagon, The Great Bear, older contemporary Swedish, also karle-, karl-, Olaus Petri [Kr?], late old Swedish karlawagnen; |
| jfr sv. dial. karsvagnen = da. karlsvognen (ags. carles wǽn, väl från nord.); | cf. Sw, dialectal karsvagnen = Danish karlsvognen (Old English carles wǽn, prob. from the Nordic Languages); |
| senare omtytt efter Karl den store, jfr Stiernhielm: then stoore Carels wagn, meng. Cherlemaynes-wayne. | later reinterpreted after Charles the Great, cf. Stiernhielm: then stoore Carels wagn, middle English Cherlemaynes-wayne. |
| Felaktigt tolkat såsom innehållande isl. karl som binamn till Oden, jfr mholl. Woenswaghen (till Woen, Oden). | Erroneously interpreted as containing Icelandic karl as a cognomen of Wodan, cf. middle Dutch Woenswaghen (to Woen, Wodan). |
| I stället sammansatt med appellativet karl i motsats till isl. kvennavagn, om Lilla Björnen. | Instead composed from the appellative karl in opposition to Icelandic kvennavagn, for the Little Bear. |
| Beteckningen 'vagn' för Stora Björnen — syftande på stjärnbildens form — är allmänt spridd, jfr t.ex. isl. vagn, ty. wagen, grek ámaxa Homerus, lat. plaustrum, fra, chariot osv. | The denotion 'wagon' for Greater Bear — alleging to the form of the constellation — is wide-spread, cf. f.ex. Icelandic vagn, German wagen, Greek ámaxa Homerus, Latin plaustrum, French chariot a.s.o. |
Catholic–Eastern Orthodox theological differences
Catholic–Eastern Orthodox theological differences[edit]
From here a horrible mess.
To rework:
Pagan philosophical influence[edit]
Modalism[edit]
 | This article needs attention from an expert in Philosophy or Theology. Please add a reason or a talk parameter to this template to explain the issue with the article. (June 2010) |
 |
 | This section possibly contains synthesis of material which does not verifiably mention or relate to the main topic. (June 2010) |
Modal logic has its origin roots in Hellenic philosophy, including Pythagorus, Plato and Aristotle[Modal logic is irrelevant for the following reasoning], who based their dialects dialectics(?) on Monism [false: dialectics is unrelated to monism] as the concept perception/idea(?) that ontology can be reduced to either a single detectable substance [nonsense: ontology is not a substance, neither can be reduced to one] (called substance theory) [unrelated] and or a single being (the concept of the Absolute) [the connection Monism/one single being is correct, the other inferences are extremely erroneous].[ref: [1]] Modal logic is by definition any system of logic that deals with possibility, potential and necessarily necessity [fairly true except the systematic miswordings] (which is dependent on actuality [irrelevant nonsense, actuality is a platonic concept, the modal logic is a modern logic concept]). See also Aristotle's Potentiality and actuality.[ref: [2]] Modalism is the way ontologically that Hellenic pagan philosophy starting with Pythagorus [false] and following through Plato[false], Aristotle and Middle Platonism[...] and Neoplatonism[false], analytically (the link is in reality Analytical Thomism!) and dialectically deconstructed human consciousness[nonsense] and existence[nonsense] in order to represent their view of the monad as the "idea" of God and ousia as the essence or universal of being.[ref: God!] Modalistic in is(?) [main clause lacks a verb, couldn't understand what it should be] the idea of God as of a single substance or being (ousia)[ref: St John Damascene gives the following definition of the conceptual value of the two terms in his Dialectic: Ousia is a thing that exists by itself, and which as need of nothing else for its consistency. Again, ousia is all that subsists by itself and which has not its being in another another what?. Pg 50 The Mystical Theology of the Eastern Church, by Vladimir Lossky SVS Press, 1997. (ISBN 0-913836-31-1) James Clarke & Co Ltd, 1991. (ISBN 0-227-67919-9)] called the monad, that then emanates sequentially various realities (hypostasis) hypostasis. These realities hypostases, which then amalgamate with one another, i.e. as in the Neoplatonism of Plotinus[verb missing]; the Monad (the dunamis, potentia) and the Dyad (creator, energeia, actus) both emanate the Triad, Trinity (Spirit or World Soul)[incoherent nonsense]. Plotinus teaching teaches(?) that energy or actus act has to have force or potential[force ≠ potential] in order to emanate (dunamis or potential - force - defined as indeterminate vitality according to A. H. Armstrong). These realities hypostases coalesce into the material world (cosmos) or Universe. Here Thomas Aquinas, in his Five Proofs of the Existence of God, starts from the pagan philosophers rational proofs[which is not correctly related before this] of the existence of the Pagan creator God[1. Aquinas does not use the "pagan God Demiurge" in his proofs; 2. there was never a "pagan God Demiurge", there was a Demiurge, but it was a "worksman", not a God, the text alleges connections that don't exist].[ref: Thomas Aquinas, ch 13 Of God and His Creatures Chapter Reasons in Proof of the Existence of God [3] "WE will put first the reasons by which Aristotle proceeds to prove the existence of God from the consideration of motion as follows."] Hellenistic Greek paganism's God which is modalist God of idealism[subordinate clause without main clause!!!]. These hypostases appear as a descending hierarchy reciprocally reflecting each other[Why is this relevant? Catholics and Protestants don't teach this.].[ref: Mystical Theology of the Eastern Church V Losskypg49]
- The preceeding is a span of confused nonsense full of grammatical errors, erroneous word usages and perfectly irrelevant discourse topics.
- Somehow it tries to reflect the opinion that there were two competing early Christian Catechetical School. The School of Alexandria tried to use Platonic thoughts to discuss God. Opposing the School of Alexandria was the School of Antioch that rejected the usage of greek "pagan" philosophers methods (excluding modal logic which doesn't belong to this topic). They were adoptionists, and it seems reasonable that Sabellianism ("modalism") was heavily influenced by the Antiochians. The Alexandrine school using Plato and gnostic aeons were opposing the adoptionism of the Antiochians, and instead proponed strict trinitarism. The Antiochian theology, after cleansing away adoptionism, became the basis of the Orthodoxes (East and Oriental), while the School of Alexandria, after cleansing away the usage of
Plato'sgnostic aeons, later competed with Augustine, instead integrating Aristotelian philosophy into Christianity. The competing philosophies of Plato and Aristoteles are still among the Catholics (Roman and others) to this day. The protestants generally prefer Augustine before Plato, but Lutherans are using Augustine's methods pretty restrictively, expressing some mystical sentiments and logic scepticisms similar to the Orthodox sentiments.
- The accusation of modalism from the Orthodox to the other Christianities regards Augustine's 'psychological analogy' of the Trinity in De Trinitate. [INSERME]
- Antiochians
Orthodoxes - Alexandrine Catholics
- Augustine Catholics
- Augustine Protestants
- Antiochians
- Modal logic: modal logic in an early form was sketched by Aristotle in Potentiality and actuality. This wasn't called "modal logic" then. Avicenna redeveloped this into a full-fledged temporal logic – a kind of "modal logic" by modern terminology – which was at that time not called "temporal logic", nor "modal logic". The matematician Clarence Irving Lewis invented the modern "modal logic" in 1910 including its name. Modal logic have no connection to Sabellianism ("modalism"), since their factual application areas, modern formal logic, versus ecclesial history, are unrelated.
- The following seems correct, it is salvageable.
The Orthodox teach that God is not of a substance that is comprehensible since God the Father has no origin and is eternal and infinite. God the Father is the origin, source of the Trinity not God in substance or essence.[ref: God!] Therefore the consciousness of God is not obtainable to created beings not in this life or the next (see apophatism). Though through co-operation with God (called theosis) Mankind can become good (God like) and from such a perspective reconcile himself to the Knowledge of Good and the Knowledge of Evil he consumed in the Garden of Eden (see the Fall of Man). Thus returning himself to the proper relationship with his creator and source of being.
Pagan philosophical modalism and idealism[edit]
| This article needs attention from an expert in Philosophy or Theology. Please add a reason or a talk parameter to this template to explain the issue with the article. (June 2010) |
Monadism[Nonexistent term] is an epistemological component of Philosophical idealism[backwards inference] and Modal logic[very false]. Which from a Hellenic Greek philosophical perspective leads to the concept that all is in and of the human mind or consciousness (nous)[false: Plato is considered idealist, Aristotle is not included here]. Therefore God is in the mind, of the mind (intrinsic) and not a real objective being[Doesn't follow!! False implication!]. This is called a form of subjective or modal interpretation of God[false] like the modal formations[nonsential noun phrase in context] contained in Aristotle's De Interpretatione[WP:OR – the book only deals with language and logic].
- The above text is not needed. It can safely be removed without making the text any disadvantage.
- Most of the following is correct, details needs checking, writing needs cleanup, the language is extremely dense by the numerous tedious confusing synonym lists.
The process of uniting to the monad and its understanding in Hellenistic Greek philosophy is called henosis. Henosis teaches that man is God (in that mankind has the concept of God intrinsic to consciousness and God can be grasp by thought or rational contemplation).[ref: pg 52 The Mystery religions: A Study in the Religious Background of Early Christianity By Samuel Angus Published by Courier Dover Publications, 1975 ISBN 0-486-23124-0, 9780486231242]
Neoplatonic pagan philosophy teaches (via Plotinus) that the first hypostasis or the monad (which is the first hypostasis) by which all things can reduce their essence, substance or being to is called dunamis or force (potentia in Latin) which emanated the second hypostasis called energy (actus) or demiurge (mind or nous as the creator), then the creator hypostasis emanated the soulor spirit. Aristotle reverses the modes hypostases into Energy first and Dunamis second, making his Unmoved Mover energy or (actus in Latin) and the second reality potential or motion.[ref: Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy Aristotle's metaphysics- Aristotle gives priority to Actuality over Potentiality [4]] Each teaching a sequential modalistic manifestation of the material world via a philosophical "concept" called God[POV-inline]. Supernatural in the East is that which is uncreated. Energies are uncreated and therefore it is critical to make a distinction between God and his Energies unlike in Pagan Philosophy. Since in Pagan Philosophy "energies" are gods[says who?] (Aphrodite for love, Athena for wisdom, Hermes for intuitivism and Mnemosyne for Memory)[yes, that might be the reasoning, but the individual gods need not be mentioned here]. Gregory Palamas in his defense of Hesychasm accused Barlaam of treating God conceptionally this way putting pagan philosophers over the saints and prophets who through revelation and not logical thought came to know God. The knowledge of God by the Eastern Orthodox church is not arrived at by a form of rational theology but rather by illumnation inner vision (theoria) as a stage of development in the process of theosis. Which again goes against the Roman Catholic theologians validation of theology using the Pagan philosopher Aristotle's Metaphysical and scholastic arguments such as actus and potentia.